PDA

View Full Version : Old threads



maxorator
10-25-2006, 05:55 AM
What do you guys have against old threads?
They're like rotten and dirty so they shouldn't be used any more?

This is a behaviour I've never understood.

http://cboard.cprogramming.com/showthread.php?t=2205&page=2

> 0-15-2001, 01:46 AM
All sing now "DioxFx is a...."
Is what? A guy who posts a question to an older thread so there arent so many threads about the same thing?

Salem
10-25-2006, 06:04 AM
5. Don't bump threads. (Bumping: posting messages on threads to move them up the list or to post on a thread that has been inactive for two weeks or longer).

Several reasons:

If it's a GD thread then it's likely to have been a topical discussion, which is only valid at the time. Bumping several years later isn't going to add anything, and half the participants either dont care anymore, or aren't here anymore.

Likewise, bumping old threads with "hey me too" or "are you still stuck?" or other equally vacuous posts doesn't do any good.

maxorator
10-25-2006, 06:08 AM
No, I mean when people ask about the same thing.
Would there really be point to make a new thread?
The first question was:
>>Is there a way to do color in a console app? Im using VC++ 6.0. Its just to jazz parts up. anyone?

The recently posted question was:
>>Hi!, How I can return to Black and White???

They aren't the same thing, but they are about console colors. So you can't call it bumping.

He probably read the rules, that he must search the forums before he posts his problem and there ya go, he found a thread about console colors.

VirtualAce
10-25-2006, 06:23 AM
No it's still bumping. He could have created his own thread. Besides if he was patient enough to drill down into 5 years of posts using a search, couldn't he have found the answer via google instead of browsing posts here?

Google, google, google.

Perspective
10-25-2006, 08:53 AM
>They aren't the same thing

Which is why they should be separate threads

maxorator
10-25-2006, 09:03 AM
I've seen no good explanations. It just seems that people are used to hate old posts and they don't even know why they actually don't like them.

GanglyLamb
10-25-2006, 09:59 AM
Some people let the board notify them by mail when their thread receives a new reply.

Maybe this is one of the reasons why people hate it when someone brings up an old thread.

Wraithan
10-25-2006, 12:00 PM
Another reason is the languages/techniques change over time.

twomers
10-25-2006, 01:42 PM
Perhaps. But maybe the thread-reviver didn't notice the last-post date when (s)he searched the board. The thing we must ask is do we prefer questions which have been asked again and again, or people who actually adhere to the guidelines and search google and/or the boards. Granted, in this example, the search got lazt - it's a very common question answered many times, but it's a step in the right direction (to a certain degree), IMO.

Prelude
10-25-2006, 02:05 PM
>I've seen no good explanations.
New questions go to new threads. The chances of an existing thread matching your problem exactly are pretty slim, and if it does then it's probably already a FAQ. Either way, posting to an existing thread decreases your chances of getting people's attention because most members filter with great prejudice. On top of that, adding "me too" style fluff to a thread makes it less useful for people who use the search feature because there's more junk to look through. So there's a rule that puts a blanket ban on bumping old threads, regardless of the reason.

Kennedy
10-25-2006, 02:21 PM
New questions go to new threads. The chances of an existing thread matching your problem exactly are pretty slim, and if it does then it's probably already a FAQ.
If the problems matched exactly, then wouldn't the thread answer the question too?

twomers
10-25-2006, 02:30 PM
From Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bump_(internet)):


To bump a thread on an internet forum is to post a reply in order to raise the thread's profile by returning it to the top of the list of active threads. For inactive threads, this is also called "necroposting", i.e. thread necromancy, or "gravedigging", as old threads are said to be dying or dead.

Consider netiquette (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netiquette) though. It counts for a lot. Reviving an old thread because it is relevant to your one gives no more benefits than starting one that goes like:


I was checking out this thread: *insert link here*, and I'm having a problem with changing da colors back to black&white. Can someone help me?

If you wanted to, you could throw in something about being a newb to make the other thread-ers more sympathetic.

Prelude
10-25-2006, 02:33 PM
>If the problems matched exactly, then wouldn't the thread answer the question too?
The problem and the question often differ.

SlyMaelstrom
10-25-2006, 10:20 PM
Another reason is the languages/techniques change over time.Agreed. Asking a question at one time and then asking it again a few years later could yield completely different results. How many people would answer a C++ question about converting strings into other data types with the suggestion of lexical_cast back in 2002-03?

In a programming forum, I'm not only not a fan of bumping old threads, I'm really not a fan of trying to learn from old threads, either. Five or so years you can get away with, but as the beginning posts on this forum starts to get around ten years old... you can see some major discrepancies in programming conventions.

VirtualAce
10-25-2006, 10:52 PM
I've seen no good explanations. It just seems that people are used to hate old posts and they don't even know why they actually don't like them.


Then you obviously can't read or you suffer from only reading what fits your mindset.

maxorator
10-26-2006, 04:00 AM
Let's say someone posts a thread named "3D objects in DirectX" and asks how he can make a cylinder. He gets an answer. Then, some years later someone else posts a reply asking, how he can make a cone. What would you say to him?


"Stop it, someone may be subscribed to this thread!"
"Stop bumping threads! You just want it to be the first thread on the list."
"Why do you ask the same thing?"
"This thread was about DirectX 9.0b, but you are probably using DirectX 9.0c"
"Cone has nothing to do with cylinder, although the title is 3D objects."

whiteflags
10-26-2006, 04:54 AM
I think that this issue doesn't matter and that you don't have a real point. Threads age, get really long, boring, and off-topic. So it's good that they are put to rest after two weeks or so. Besides, I personally would hate wading through 100+ posts to get an answer to a question, and so would anyone inclined to answer it. As we've informed you.

Thread over!

p.s - failing free thought, he'd get the answer from 4chan.org

Govtcheez
10-26-2006, 04:58 AM
> Then, some years later someone else posts a reply asking, how he can make a cone.

I'd say "if the original poster has been waiting for several years for someone just to tell him how to make a cone, he should probably kill himself"

Frobozz
10-26-2006, 05:09 AM
Let's say someone posts a thread named "3D objects in DirectX" and asks how he can make a cylinder. He gets an answer. Then, some years later someone else posts a reply asking, how he can make a cone. What would you say to him?
Actually I'd more likely say something along the lines of "What exactly is this thread about again?" The reason has been given in slightly different ways. Essentially most people are either gone from the forum or have forgotten what the thread was about. Also threads with a lot of posts to them are less likely to be read because it would take longer. Especially pointless threads like this one. :p

CornedBee
10-26-2006, 08:22 AM
Let's say someone posts a thread named "3D objects in DirectX" and asks how he can make a cylinder. He gets an answer. Then, some years later someone else posts a reply asking, how he can make a cone. What would you say to him?

"What did you just gain from posting this in the old thread instead of a new one?"

maxorator
10-26-2006, 08:36 AM
"What did you just lose from posting this in the old thread instead of a new one?"

CornedBee
10-26-2006, 08:39 AM
For example, I, as a potential helper, lost the information that this is, in fact, a new thread that has not yet been answered. I lost the information that the poster is the OP of the thread. I lose the exact and immediate (without reading tiny timestamps) knowledge of what is relevant to the new question and what is not.

Decrypt
10-26-2006, 12:55 PM
"What did you just lose from posting this in the old thread instead of a new one?"I, as a frequent searcher of this forum, just lost the availability of two concise and complete guides for the (not-too-distant) future. If I am searching for how to make a cone, my search will come up with this thread, but I'll have to weed through all of the cylinder stuff I don't care about to get to the cone. It's annoying.

In the end, it comes down this:
If you don't bump, there's no harm done. If the thread topic is horribly frequent, it will be added to the FAQ.
If you bump the thread, there are a multitude of problems that can occur. Sometimes bumping may not be a big deal, and other times it is.

Since nothing is lost by posting a new thread, the administrators have decided not to allow bumping as a whole. It's a simple choice based on the weighted consequences of both options. It is not, as you imply, like throwing the baby out with the bath water, since there is no baby in this particular bath water.

VirtualAce
10-26-2006, 01:19 PM
But then we could just as well waste board space by debating this stupid topic into oblivion.
We have rules concerning this and I'd say thats the number one reason not to bump threads.

So in the end this comes down to a I want to do A but the rules prohibit A so how can I get my way?

Wraithan
10-26-2006, 01:38 PM
Most times when I search this forum, anything older than 3 years I don't even look at. Consider some APIs over the years... like DirectX what was suggested when DX7 was out is vastly different than DX9.

Also with compilers becoming more and more standards compliant, the available ways of doing things are different.

I know 70% of why I don't like old threads. The other 30% is the unjust predejuce I carry against everything! :D

SlyMaelstrom
10-26-2006, 09:54 PM
The other 30% is the unjust predejuce I carry against everything! :DThe other 30% are the same questions that get asked every single day. "How to make my console stay up after my program finishes! HELP!" If you're going to respond to one of those posts, you might as well respond to the one that was likely asked within the past 24 hours.

maxorator
10-27-2006, 02:23 AM
OK, heard your thoughts :D

kermi3
10-27-2006, 04:41 AM
It's been the rule for about 7 years now. For that reasonhabit,. alaone, as well as the other astute reasons given here, the rule isn't changing. I like habit.