"Use the search function!" "Stop ressurecting old threads!"

[Dipstikk]

Okay, there has to be an understanding here. Now I'm as guilty of doing this as anyone else, but I've come to realize that this whole "using the search function to find the topic you're talking about, but don't ressurect old threads" thing is confusing.

Say there's a guy named Person, and Person makes a topic concerning what we'll refer to as Oddworld Subject. Well, it turns out that Oddworld Subject has been talked about before. Now, people know this, and Forumers 1, 2, and 3 come to the thread, call him a "noob," and tell him to use the search function to locate existing threads on the topic. Mod locks it, telling Person to use the search function.

Now, it seems that Oddworld Subject hasn't actually been talked about for years, and Forumers 1, 2, and 3 are just pissed because the topic is common knowledge to fans. In fact, the last time that Oddworld Discussion was really discussed (I mean viciously debated, revolutionary ideas posted) was three years before the new thread was born. But Person has some good ideas, and feels that they should be posed, and ressurects the old topic.

But nobody wants to discuss Oddworld Subject in a three-year-old topic. Instead, Forumers 1,2, and 3 tell him that the topic is three years old, agree with each other in quotes, and ask WHY a three-year-old topic was brought back. Mod steps in and tells Person not to ressurect old threads, and locks it.

Anyone see the problem here?

[mitsur]

This seems fairly common in the many threads I've seen in different threads.

Good job on posting this, Dipstikk, but its been talked about before. Use the search function, you n00b.

You were asking for someone to say that

[Dipstikk]

You wascally wabbit!

[used:)]

Tis the cycle of newcomers.

To be honest, I have learned in many ways that they are puirely ignorant, not in a bad way, they came to these forums to discuss ODDWORLD, sow e can expect some of this stuff to pop up. We just have to tolerate it and move on.

[Nate]

I think you're missing the point. If they create a thread asking a commonly known question then we tell them to use the search function but if they're contributing something new then we let it slide and the new thread takes on a life of its own.

[oddveteran93]

If this "ressurecting old topics" is such a problem then I have a simple solution. Whenever someone joins and they have to click the little link in the email to activate their account, before the link write in bold letters: "PLEASE DON'T RESSURECT OLD TOPICS, USE THE SEARCH ENGINE BEFORE MAKING A NEW TOPIC" and so on.

[Cullen Heath]

I kind of disagree with this. If someone wants to know something, they SHOULD use the search function. It's much, much better than having a pointless thread wandering about that was made just to ask ONE SIMPLE QUESTION.

It's like if "Person" was in General Discussion and wanted to know one thing about Abe's Hand Scars (Just an example), then he would think: "Hey, I should make a handy-dandy thread about "Why Abe's Hand Scars are shaped the way that they are" (Just another funky example), when "Person" should just go into the beautiful "Oddworld Questions & Answers" Thread and say: "Hey guys, do any of you know why Abe's Hand Scars are shaped the way that they are?"

[SeaRex]

I've thought about this before.

Generally speaking, you only tell someone to use the "search" function when said person is asking a FAQ. However, this practice has become common in Off-Topic when someone creates a thread that we've already had in recent memory. This is, of course, the wrong thing to do. Newbies are curious folk, and we were all "there" at one point. Just play along.

Of course, it's when we have multiple topics in the first five or so pages (sadly, sometimes even on the same page)... that's when problems arise. This is why it's nice to remind newbies to thumb through a few pages at their leisure, but nothing as drastic as telling them to use the search function every time they want to start a new thread.

Plus, whining about the search feature promotes resurrection of old threads, which is almost always bad. So yeah. Good excuse to crack down on the misuse of the old "OMG USE TEH SAERCH!!1" thing.

Which I will be doing. Starting now.

[Havoc]

Search only goes for the FAQ, which anyone should be inteligent enough to do without anyone here telling them to. As far as resurrecting topics goes; as long as the topic isn't closed, or put in Necrum, correct me if I'm wrong, but in that case it doesn't say anywhere you can't post in it. If a topic is burried 5 pages deep, anyone can still post it in it and if you don't want people to post in realy old topics, then that's the admin and moderators responsibility. Either choose to lock all old topics, or install some plugin that automaticly locks topics after a given period of time. But blaming newbies for posting in an open topic is like getting a speeding ticket on your bike...

[Nate]

Well, we have had threads that have been resurrected and then continued on as if no time has passed, generally because someone had a new thought on an old topic. The 'Should Ugly People Be Allowed To Breed?' thread springs to mind here. But someone reviving a thread as if it had been only been idle for a day or so, not adding something new to justify bringing it back, is a crime against humanity.

[Havoc]

Yea, but thats the diffrence between a new guy and a moron :P.

[SeaRex]

I'm sorry, but old threads are an eyesore. Nobody wants to post in them.

I'm not talking about threads that are only a few months old; I have no problem with that. When threads that are a year or more old get revived, it's just an annoyance. Old conversations that nobody wants to see, featuring members that in all likelihood don't even come here in more. Blech. Eyesore.

Anyway, trust in your mod team. We shall take care of it. Better yet, if a newbie posts in an ancient-ass topic, just don't post. Let it sink to the bottom of the page.

[Havoc]

Well isn't Necrum meant for old topics like that? Why not just mass-prune the last 2-3 pages every 6 months or so? That's what I used to do on an old forum I co-owned.

[Dino]

The thing is, I don't understand why a person should be denied their chance to discuss something just because everyone else did three years ago. It seems unfair to me.

Dunno if anyone agrees, don't care really, just thought I'd put that out there.

[SeaRex]

Well isn't Necrum meant for old topics like that? Why not just mass-prune the last 2-3 pages every 6 months or so? That's what I used to do on an old forum I co-owned.

Good for you.

Here it's just easier to close revived topics (which are incredibly rare) and just not post in an old thread when someone brings it back.

Look, if Xav or somebody wants to do the prune thing, then that's cool, but I doubt Rich or I will do anything like that for OT. Plus, threads that are past the first three pages in OT can only be found by using the "search" function anyway, so the easiest thing to do is not to encourage people to use it for no real reason.

[metroixer]

I agree with Dip's compalint here. But what i'm thinking of here. Isn't this partially(PARTIALLY) our fault? We tell the "person" to use the search function. Technically he might think(MIGHT) that he/she wants to talk about it in said topic. So maybe we should blame oursleves a little abput this type of situation. >.>

[Nate]

I think it's best to keep old threads in their place rather than sending them to Necrum because then GD and OT become warehouses of information, rather than forcing someone to search Necrum for something they want to know.

Perhaps it would be possible to automatically close any thread that has not been posted in for a year?

[Xavier]

I'm against trowing old topics into the necrum...
on the other hand NDW's idea of closing old threads that have not been posted in for a year is excellent, I second it.

[SeaRex]

To be honest, we could probably do some of these ideas if you guys are pretty adamant about it.

However, it would probably be better to wait for Peter to get back from vacation before I did anything to the forums themselves. As far as the technical (well... not even technical) web-based jargon and phrases that vBulletin uses... I'm more or less at a loss. It's just one of those things that doesn't "click" with me.

If I tried to do something, the forum would most likely implode.