Is Thread Necromancy Ok?

Do you like Thread Necromancy?


Kanegrundar

Explorer
I don't really care as long as the new poster has something interesting to add rather than a simple "me to" bump. Even then, it's easy for me to simply not read the thread.

Kane
 

log in or register to remove this ad



diaglo

Adventurer
Other.

tired old topics which get recycled every three months don't need threadomancy. people don't bother to look to see if the topic was posted even just 1 week ago much less a couple months ago.

so bumping old threads forward with basically the same title still won't get people to read them. thus why the expression rtfm is wasted on them.

but digging up a unique old thread for a question that is not exactly the same can help someone get some ideas. or one with a link to another site with the answer can be helpful too.
 

It depends on the thread. Some threads are worth bringing back for particular reasons, like the 1000 non-RPG websites or Piratecat's GenCon Sleep Advice thread that I bring back every year. Other threads could easily be started over to bring in a new round of participants, and a post with a link to the old thread for reference is all that is needed.
 

der_kluge

Adventurer
Guilty as charged. Usually some other thread will remind me of a really old one, and I'll go hunt it down for nostalgia's sake.
 

Len

Prodigal Member
Mokona said:
Do you feel suckered when you post in an resurrected thread?
If that's why you do it, then NO I don't like it.

I also don't see the point in resurrecting a discussion about what an upcoming product might be like, years after the product is released.
 

BSF

Explorer
So long as something new has been added I am fine with it. The silly ones are the threads in Rules for 3.0 where the discussion was about a problem fixed in 3.5.

I have raised threads myself. But not very often and I try to make the post relevant. Otherwise, I try to link to older threads for reference.
 



Remove ads

Top